Revisiting the mutant prevention concentration to guide dosing in childhood tuberculosis

Comparison of Mutant Prevention Concentrations of Fluoroquinolones Against ESBL-Positive and ESBL-Negative Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolates from Orthopedic Patients

The majority of Klebsiella pneumonia isolates possess the extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) enzymes. Therefore, K. pneumoniae can easily develop drug resistance. How to effectively overcome the problem of drug resistance in K. pneumoniae is still a research hotspot. This study aimed to compare the mutant prevention concentration (MPC) of ESBL-positive and ESBL-negative K. pneumoniae isolated from orthopedic patients, which may provide a basis for the effective use of drugs to control the enrichment of resistance mutants of K. pneumoniae. The MPC90 values of 55 isolates of ESBL-positive K. pneumoniae against 4 fluoroquinolones were 32 µg/mL for levofloxacin and gatifloxacin, 16 µg/mL for ciprofloxacin, and 4 µg/mL for gemifloxacin. The selection index value was 8 for levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin and 2 for gemifloxacin and gatifloxacin, respectively. For ESBL-negative K. pneumoniae isolates, the MPC90 values were 16 µg/mL for levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin, 4 µg/mL for gemifloxacin, and 32 µg/mL for gatifloxacin. The selection index value was 8 for levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin, 2 for gemifloxacin, and 4 for gatifloxacin. For the ESBL-positive K. pneumoniae, the %T>MIC90 order was gemifloxacin > levofloxacin > ciprofloxacin > gatifloxacin. For the ESBL-negative K. pneumoniae, the %T>MIC90 order was levofloxacin > gemifloxacin > ciprofloxacin > gatifloxacin. The mutant-preventing ability of gatifloxacin and gemifloxacin was the strongest among the 4 fluoroquinolones. So gemifloxacin may be the first choice of drug to treat K. pneumoniae infection.

Tigecycline-Rifampicin Restrains Resistance Development in Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae

The goal of this study was to clarify the synergistic antibacterial activity of the combination of tigecycline (TGC) and rifampicin (RIF). Additionally, the study sought to investigate the impact of this combination on the development of mutational resistance and to assess its efficacy in an in vivo model using Galleria mellonella. Through a checkerboard test, we found that the combination of TGC and RIF showed synergistic antibacterial activity against carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP). The fractional inhibition concentration index (FICI) was found to be ≤0.5, confirming the potency of the combination. Additionally, this synergistic effect was further validated in vivo using the G. mellonella infection model. TGC-RIF treatment had a lower mutant prevention concentration (MPC) than that of monotherapy, indicating its potential to reduce the development of mutational resistance. We observed a substantial variation in the MPCs of TGC and RIF when they were measured at different proportions in the combinations. Furthermore, during the resistant mutant selection window (MSW) test, we noticed a correlation between strains with low FICI and low MSW. The expression of efflux-pump-related genes, namely rarA and acrB, is significantly decreased in the combination therapy group. This indicates that altered expression levels of certain efflux pump regulator genes are associated with a combined decrease in bacterial mutation resistance. In conclusion, the combination of TGC and RIF effectively suppresses antibiotic resistance selection in CRKP. This study establishes a paradigm for evaluating drug-resistant mutant suppression in antimicrobial combination therapy.

The uncertain role of substandard and falsified medicines in the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance

Approximately 10% of antimicrobials used by humans in low- and middle-income countries are estimated to be substandard or falsified. In addition to their negative impact on morbidity and mortality, they may also be important drivers of antimicrobial resistance. Despite such concerns, our understanding of this relationship remains rudimentary. Substandard and falsified medicines have the potential to either increase or decrease levels of resistance, and here we discuss a range of mechanisms that could drive these changes. Understanding these effects and their relative importance will require an improved understanding of how different drug exposures affect the emergence and spread of resistance and of how the percentage of active pharmaceutical ingredients in substandard and falsified medicines is temporally and spatially distributed.

Comparing the minimum inhibitory and mutant prevention concentrations of selected antibiotics against animal isolates of Pasteurella multocida and Salmonella typhimurium

Historically, the use of antibiotics was not well regulated in veterinary medicine. The emergence of antibiotic resistance (ABR) in pathogenic bacteria in human and veterinary medicine has driven the need for greater antibiotic stewardship. The preservation of certain antibiotic classes for use exclusively in humans, especially in cases of multidrug resistance, has highlighted the need for veterinarians to reduce its use and redefine dosage regimens of antibiotics to ensure efficacy and guard against the development of ABR pathogens. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), the lowest concentration of an antibiotic drug that will prevent the growth of a bacterium, is recognised as a method to assist in antibiotic dosage determination. Minimum inhibitory concentrations sometimes fail to deal with first-step mutants in bacterial populations; therefore dosing regimens based solely on MIC can lead to the development of ABR. The mutant prevention concentration (MPC) is the minimum inhibitory antibiotic concentration of the most resistant first-step mutant. Mutant prevention concentration determination as a complementary and sometimes preferable alternative to MIC determination for veterinarians when managing bacterial pathogens. The results of this study focused on livestock pathogens and antibiotics used to treat them, which had a MIC value of 0.25 µg/mL for enrofloxacin against all 27 isolates of Salmonella typhimurium. The MPC values were 0.50 µg/mL, with the exception of five isolates that had MPC values of 4.00 µg/mL. The MPC test yielded 65.52% (18 isolates) Salmonella isolates with florfenicol MICs in the sensitive range, while 11 isolates were in the resistant range. Seventeen isolates (58.62%) of Pasteurella multocida had MIC values in the susceptible range and 41.38% (12 isolates) had an intermediate MIC value. Mutant prevention concentration determinations as done in this study is effective for the antibiotic treatment of bacterial infections and minimising the development of resistance. The MPC method can be used to better control to prevent the development of antibiotic drug resistance used in animals.

Variation in Mutant Prevention Concentrations

Objectives:Understanding how phenotypic traits vary has been a longstanding goal of evolutionary biologists. When examining antibiotic-resistance in bacteria, it is generally understood that the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) has minimal variation specific to each bacterial strain-antibiotic combination. However, there is a less studied resistance trait, the mutant prevention concentration (MPC), which measures the MIC of the most resistant sub-population. Whether and how MPC varies has been poorly understood. Here, we ask a simple, yet important question: How much does the MPC vary, within a single strain-antibiotic association? Using a Staphylococcus species and five antibiotics from five different antibiotic classes—ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, gentamicin, nitrofurantoin, and oxacillin—we examined the frequency of resistance for a wide range of concentrations per antibiotic, and measured the repeatability of the MPC, the lowest amount of antibiotic that would ensure no surviving cells in a 10¹⁰ population of bacteria.

Results: We found a wide variation within the MPC and distributions that were rarely normal. When antibiotic resistance evolved, the distribution of the MPC changed, with all distributions becoming wider and some multi-modal.

Conclusion: Unlike the MIC, there is high variability in the MPC for a given bacterial strain-antibiotic combination.